Topic: Should the age of contractual capacity be raised? For this week’s Discuss

Topic: Should the age of contractual capacity be raised?
For this week’s Discussion, you will share your your response to the following prompt with your Discussion Group. This is a group discussion, so be sure to reply to at least one other student.
Background: In most states, including California, the contract age of majority is currently age 18. As you’ve learned in this unit, contracts entered into by minors under this age are generally voidable at the minor’s option. This contract doctrine of capacity is based on the policy of protecting minors from their own poor financial decisions and lack of adult-like judgment. Until comparatively recently, the age of contract majority had been 21, and some argue that the law should return to that standard.
Discussion Prompt: Please take one of the following positions: (1) the age of contractual capacity should remain at 18 years old; or (2) why you believe that another age–or another standard, besides age–would be more appropriate for the state to determine that an individual can agree to a legally binding agreement. In crafting your argument for the change, or for maintaining the status quo, you may want to consider biology, changes in culture, or the ability to purchase cigarettes or alcohol have any bearing on this change. Provide two arguments in support of your position.
After you’ve posted your response, please reply to at least one of your classmates. For example, did their argument(s) make you rethink your position? Or did their response give greater strength to your argument?
Directions:
Post your initial reply (10 points) to the topic above.
Read through the other entries and reply (5 points) to at least one classmate.
Please make a substantive contribution to the discussion; short replies such as “I agree” will not earn full points. When you reply, make sure to use professional grammar and punctuation.